One of my big commitments is trying to get in a class every month on some sort of martial skill. Mostly, that’s guns, because guns are fun, but I’m good with knives, hand-to-hand, medical, whatever. It is expensive, but they’re usually one day and local, so there’s not a lot of ancillary costs.
The big problem is often making the call about what class to go to. There are some months where I’ve got hard choices. Do I do the Green Ops practical pistol clinic, the FPF Training Minuteman Rifle class, or the PNTC PRS class?
In an attempt to solve that conundrum, I’ve got a list of priorities that I try to use to as an evaluation standard to determine what I should take. These are ordered in importance to me, but no priority will ever totally override the others. I am very interested in what my readership feels about these, so please leave comments if you agree/disagree!
Here’s me dry-firing. No cuts, except for the one where my old camera conked out at a 4gb file limit, and a touch of trimming at the beginning and end for where I was manipulating my camera. I am not saying this is good or whatever, but I am saying that this is how it looks when someone does the work. It is not always smooth or perfect, especially at first.
Ignore the Instagram-driven BS. If it looks awesome all the time, you’re not doing it right.
Every time I see someone ask about non-5.56 calibers on the AR-15 platform, there’s a legion of fanboys who start proclaiming that .300 AAC (aka, .300 BLK or Blackout or whatever) is the way to go. Let’s take a look at its capabilities:
Subsonic .300AAC? All the ballistics and energy of .45ACP. Somewhat better penetration due to bullet profile, but I don’t get the hype at all. We’ve spent literally decades declaring PCCs and SMGs dead, and now this is the hotness?
Supersonic .300AAC? Nearly indistinguishable from 7.62×39 in terms of ballistics, and if you’re OK with .308 bullets in a .311 bore, the bullet selection is the same.
Yes, .300AAC can be a .45 ACP and a 7.62×39 on demand. That’s the best cartridge design of the years 1911 and 1944, all in one gun. That’s not a compelling to me. But, OK… let’s say that is compelling to you. I can use my imagination!
I am going to lead off with a rather controversial statement, but I think it’s one I can justify: when choosing and configuring a long gun for any specific role that involves dynamic movement, there are four top considerations: reliability, functionality, weight, and cost. I frequently see people ignoring weight, and it drives me crazy.
I was reading the Civilian Gunfighter blog recently – it’s fantastic – and they had a really great series of posts up on there looking back at 2018 and discussing their plans for 2019. Unlike them, I don’t have a lot of really cool stuff to talk about or have much wisdom to share, but I think it might be informative – and hopefully inspirational – for people to understand what happened with me starting in April.
When I was listening to the Primary and Secondary podcast, there was a really good discussion of “how to be a good student” from the perspective of the trainers, along with an accompanying discussion on the forum. I’ve done a lot of training lately, and I thought I’d do my own take on it. To me, there’s two big categories here: prep before class, and what you do at class.
Prep before class has a few subcategories:
Supplies for physical needs
But what you do at class, and even after class, is important, too… and instructors, that’s you, too.
Something I’ve been mulling over for the past week or so were Tim Chandler’s comments on shotgun selection at the class I took with him. The advice he gave about avoiding detachable box mags seemed hard to understand to me at the time. Like, I get that you need a reliable gun, but people run guns with mags all the time for defense, so it had to be more than that. I think I now see where he’s coming from… and I think it stems from not really understanding that, much like a rifle, expecting one shotgun to do it all is not reasonable or viable.